Speer 200 GDHP wetpack/Denim tests

[Raggedyman]

EAA Witness.

[DM1906]

I worked up some loads with AA9 and Longshot.  AA9 is NOT the powder for this bullet at higher velocities. Primers were too flattened (flowing) and case web expansion too great for the velocities, all bellow 1200 FPS. I'll get the measurements up, but too great according to my visual observation. This with the LWD 5.2" barrel. I did not shoot them in the Glock OEM barrel, so the measurements may be irrelevant.

Longshot was much better, with much less case expansion at greater velocity, up to 1240, same barrel. I haven't shot this in the Glock barrel, but will when I set up next.

I also shot them in my 6.5" RBH. The AA9 loads saw some difficult extraction at about the same load as higher pressure rounds in the LWD barrel. I topped out the Longshot loads at 1305 FPS, and can go much higher. Other than typical "magnum caliber" primer flattening, it wasn't at all eventful, at the pistol-end.

I shot them into rows of 4 gallon square buckets full of water with sealed lids, 1" gap between, intending to capture them. Well, easier said than done. 40 rounds in, and only one bullet found. The buckets are 9" across, and almost every round, from 1140 to 1205 FPS penetrated and ruptured 2 buckets. The highest velocity rounds, 1290 to 1305, completely ruptured and fragged the buckets. Frag-nasty, or so I thought. The one bullet I found looked really bad, peeled back flat to the "dot", with little mass away from the core. After weighing and measuring, it showed fairly impressive performance. Retained weight was 182.4 grains (the bullets I used weighed 200 gr, +/- 0.5 gr.), with min/max diameters at .5840/.8485". The core mass was solid, and a consistent .5840" expanded diameter, with 2 opposing expanded petals at .8485". This bullet was located about 20' forward, about 45 degrees of POI. According to the retained weight and expanded diameters, the bullet held up surprisingly well, with exceptional terminal performance. 90+ percent retention of mass and 150+ percent mean expansion is well within minimal performance standards of even the best hunting bullets, of any caliber. We'll see about the penetration, but it's at least 9", and appeared to be at least a few inches more. What really surprised (impressed) me, was the bonding of the jacket. No separation, whatsoever, core mass or petals. This was only one bullet, so I may be assuming a lot, although the visual results weren't all that different from 475/480's first post. The velocities I did were higher, but the bullet looked about the same as his pic.

I didn't have the setup time or help this time. I plan on repeating the tests in other media, with a better bullet capture and penetration measurement method. Water-soaked newsprint, clay and dry sand, through various barriers (denim, wood, metal, etc.).

[The_Shadow]

Please tell me more about the load data, what charge weights did you try with LongShot and AA#9. 
BTW I have seen some of the worst flattened primers ever using full loads of AA#9.

I settled on the 9.2 grains of LongShot over the CCI 350 primer with this Speer 200gr GDHP @ 1230-1240 fps. Also using the CCI300 primer with the same load is still at the 1200+ mark.  I think these have a better reliability for feeding and extracting in the semi-auto platforms.  Pushing the LongShot at 9.4 started showing casing stresses...

[DM1906]

Please tell me more about the load data, what charge weights did you try with LongShot and AA#9. 
BTW I have seen some of the worst flattened primers ever using full loads of AA#9.

I settled on the 9.2 grains of LongShot over the CCI 350 primer with this Speer 200gr GDHP @ 1230-1240 fps. Also using the CCI300 primer with the same load is still at the 1200+ mark.  I think these have a better reliability for feeding and extracting in the semi-auto platforms.  Pushing the LongShot at 9.4 started showing casing stresses...

Sorry. The powder charges weren't at all remarkable. The charges are about what everyone else has already done. These are just my results in different guns.

I loaded 8.4 to 9.2 gr. with Longshot, and it settled very consistently at 9.2 gr. with 1240 FPS in the 5.2" LWD, and 1305 FPS in the 6.5" revolver. I also used CCI 350 primers, all were seated to 1.260", with a firm crimp, in new DT nickel brass. I hadn't intended to increase past 9.2 gr. for auto use, but will for the revolver, just 'cause. I haven't loaded them for the .38-40 yet, but will to get some data and results on much higher velocities. All for fun, of course, because the velocities we've already done, are well past the design of the bullet. Who knows, maybe it'll wake up north of 1600 FPS. I doubt it, but I have lots of buckets, and it's just fun blowing stuff up (and my range grass gets a good watering at the same time).

The AA9 charges were from 11.6 to 12.6 gr. The primers didn't make a difference that I could see. I loaded them with CCI 300 and 350, WLP, and Wolf NCLP, after the first test with the CCI350. All the same, as I've experienced with other loads using AA9. None of the loads were consistent above about 1140 FPS (5.2" bbl). Every load was hand weighed, during charging and after loaded, and the brass was new and pre-measured (all the same length/weight w/o trimming or sizing) and deburred. AA9 is just not the ideal powder for this load. Lower velocities were dirty, and the higher were inconsistent with frequent (inconsistent) pressure indicators. None of the charge increases were linear with velocities. None of the case expansion measurements were remarkable, EXCEPT 2 charges of AA9. Most were consistent at .4285" (LWD) and .4280" (revolver), which is typical for these very tight chambers (no "bulge" relief on either). Two charges of AA9, 12.2 and 12.6 gr. (but not 12.4 gr.) were .4295" and .4305" (the max I've seen with any previous nuke load), respectively. I repeated an additional 5 each of the suspect loads, and with the other primers, but the result was the same, except for the (expected) velocity drop of about 30 FPS with the non-magnum primers. I'm not wasting any more bullets on AA9 tests.

When I test these again, I'll add some Blue Dot loads. Perhaps some 800X (not one of my favorites, but I have it) and IMR4227.

[The_Shadow]

Thanks for your detailed post.  The 800X we tested were 9.4 grains and just over the 1200 fps mark...
Remington 2 ½ primers COAL 1.250" Jag and Starline brass

Tested by Jesse Atkins
Limited Pro 4.75" 200gr Gold Dot 9.4gr's 800-X 1208, 1216, 1265, 1230, 1237. Average = 1231.2 FPS/ 673 LBS. Another nice one!

Blue Dot and Power Pistol may yield some decent numbers but the IMR4227 in my opinion would be dismal performance.

Good luck!

[DM1906]

I agree about the 4227. Just a passing thought, and I have lots. Probably a better option for the .38-40. I'm out of PP, but have lots of Blue Dot. BD is one of my favorites. It seems I always end up back to it with most high power pistol rounds at one point. I didn't do any yet because I knew I would, eventually.

I may not do any 800X. Really, I'm looking for a reason to not use it. If it's no better than Longshot, or others, I'll skip it.

[Raggedyman]

Maybe I need to stop being a pansy and push harder.

Don't be disappointed by the water results, though. Water typically shows more bullet upset than you would see in gel or tissue.